of worried about whether i will even get any money at all. host: we will leave it there. you're from george washington, not georgetown. final thoughts? guest: think you or your service. eventually, this will get resolved. the question is whether it will be resolved before there is a crash, essentially, as we think of this in the game of chicken or after. we're not going to die. it would be bad. long term, we but keep making host: lawsuits? guest: guess, if there's of the failure to pay. when they're not paid according to the right schedule, that's counts as a default. host: we will leave it there.

michael abramowicz, thanks for your time. live coverage of the house today if. they continue to work was building -- on a spending bill today for the energy department and the legislation on a flood insurance. we will be back tomorrow morning. live coverage of the house of representatives on c-span. washington, d.c., july 12, 2011 . i hereby appoint the honorable ann marie buerkle to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 5, 2011, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes each,

but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. poe. for five minutes. mr. poe: madam speaker, we are worse off now than we were in 2008. the country is suffering through an economic recession with more long-term unemployment than during the great depression. the economy was in bad shape, but this administration has made it worse. the unconstitutional government takeover of health care created a cloud of uncertainty for small business owners stalling job growth. our health care system was in trouble before, but this administration has made it worse. our country is spiraling toward a domestic energy crisis thanks to the administration's insistence on punishing u.s. oil companies. the price of energy was high before but this administration makes it worse. americans are becoming used to

living with the word crisis. under boimism, crisis has become the -- under obamaism crisis has become the word. mr. president, this road is full of potholes. the national debt is expected to equal 101% of the economy in 10 years. unemployment is around 9.2%. home sales has declined. the number of food stamp recipients has skyrocketed. we have witnessed an administrations set on entitling people as opposed to helping people to work. we are worse now than when the president stepped food on 1600 pennsylvania avenue. we are stuck in this hole because the white house policies is toxic to job creators. businesses don't operate like the government does. they don't function under short-term budgets. they don't plan for the next six days or six months like the government does.

business owners want to plan. they want to know what will happen next, and under this cloud of uncertainty businesses face obamacare as employer mandate and an onslaught of costly regulations. this leaves them with few choices. hold, wait it out or shut down and move overseas. coming up on this bumpy road is a domestic energy shortage. the white house seeks to punish the energy of today and tomorrow in favor of potential energy of after our lifetimes. an energy agenda that is sue none muss of stall, disinstruct, discourt and jury and penalize will only devastate the economy further and force more businesses and jobs to go away. we have seen the administration slow walk the approval process for offshore drilling permits despite lifting the moratorium. the delays have been costly, so costly that rigs have left the gulf of mexico never to return

and those jobs will not return either. the coming domestic energy shortage will be partly due to the white house wanting to help foreign nations with their domestic energy instead of maximizing our own god-given natural resources. when the president told brazil that america will help expand its offshore drilling operations and be one of its best customers he sent a clear message. he doesn't support u.s. oil, u.s. companies or u.s. workers. each day that passes without a pipeline that will import oil shale from our neighbor to the north down to my district in texas, it's another day that the u.s. pivots on u.s. energy jobs. canada is eager. the white house has a nonfrom below mentality. we need an all-of-the-above strategy that puts americans back to work.

the administration has mastered the art of turning a crisis into an opportunity to shove unpopular policies through. over a year after the deepwater horizon explosion the administration has come to closing down operations in the gulf. 12,000 jobs have been lost. are we better off today than we were in 2008? no. our economy is still in crisis of uncertainty. the answers under obamaism is to increase government control over our lives and raise taxes on people who pay taxes. this plan is an attack on freedom. more government spending and control is the problem, not the solution. as senator rubio has said, instead of raising taxes we should have more taxpayers. more new taxpayers under the concept of developing more businesses, more jobs also yields more taxpayers. this will create revenue. the white house has operated under crisis management. the doctrine of obamaism with its expansion of the government

has made america worse. it is time for new hope, new change and a new america day and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, for five minutes. mr. defazio: we're in the 10th year of the bush tax cuts and the third year of the obama tax cuts. taxes today are at the lowest percentage of our national economy since 1950. and, of course, that pre-exists a few things like medicare, homeland security, massive spending on wars overseas, etc. yet, last friday with this very, very alike tax burden, we had the official unemployment numbers. they were horrible. but bess what, the reality is worse than the numbers. -- but guess what, the reality

is worse than the numbers. unplanned parenthood, looking for work or underplanned parenthood. so i guess what we need to do is cut taxes more and cut spending and we'll have an economic boom. yeah, we'll have a boom like boom of imploding economy, just like the last 10 years. the worst job creation since the great depression under this theory that tax cuts solve every problem. now, the president's response on friday was, not surprisingly, continue tax cuts. the new one he's adopted is the social security tax holiday. but don't worry. we'll make the trust fund whole. we'll borrow $110 billion from china, we'll put it into the social security trust fund and everyone will get $15 or $20 a week and this will solve the problems of this economy. it's not going to create jobs. that's his big solution. number two solution, more job-killing free trade agreements.

great patent reform. yeah, maybe someday. then at the very end, oh, we should have a little bitty infrastructure bank. oh, ok. now, the republicans on thursday, they preceded this in one option. they proposed that the united states of america with crumbling highways, falling down bridges and obsolete transit systems cut infrastructure by 35%. so the construction industry that has today 16% unemployment, under the republican plan 25% unemployment. that's great. that's going to work too. oh, yeah, and more tax cuts. you know, we lack the will around here to address our nation's greatest problems. not the means. chronic unemployment is the greatest problem in this country. we solve chronic unemployment, a quarter of the deficit goes away because people are not collecting unemployment benefits and food stamps. they're working and surviving and paying taxes. now, how about canceling some

of these stupid tax cuts? particularly the social security tax holiday? let's not borrow $110 billion from china for people to dribble away in $20 a week payments. let's take that $110 billion and build things in america with american workers and buy america requirements. we could put four million, five million people back to work. let's can sell the tax cuts over people $250,000 a year, the job creators who are pretty undertaxed right now and have record savings and wealth. if they contributed a little bit, that would be about another million jobs if we put that $23 billion a year into investment and infrastructure. and these aren't just construction jobs. they're engineering jobs, they're manufacturing jobs, they're small business suppliers. we need an investment-driven recovery. for too long we've been trying under both bush and under obama to have a borrowed money consumption-driven recovery. ain't going to work.

not good long term. indebting our kids and giving them but consumption. let's provide benefits for generations to come with a 21st century infrastructure for this country. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. murphy, for five minutes. mr. murphy: thank you. well, while deliberations continue about dealing with our $14.3 trillion deficit or debt, while blixes continue on raising the debt -- deliberations continue on raising the debt ceiling, americans are concerned where we're going. june unemployment at 9.2% and the growth of only 18,000 jobs translates to a meager 360 jobs per state. now, when you look at how many high school students graduated in june, that's 3.7 million. colleges graduated more.

it barely covers students at one typical college per state with a typical major. no wonder americans are worried about our economy when so many youth are entering the job market only to find there are no jobs. so while our leaders on both sides of the aisle are deliberating, unfortunately, too much in the media becomes a battle of words. let's keep in mind that one way to balance america's budget, one very important way to deal with america's debt is to grow jobs. for each 1% decline in unemployment, it's $90 billion per year in federal revenue. that's a decrease in unemployment compensation. that's an increase in federal revenues. that's 1.5 million jobs for every 1% decline unemployment. let me again quote our colleague from across the building here, senator rubio, who said this is not about

increasing taxes, it's about increasing taxpayers and this could do it. now, the cost per job in the failed stimulus bill was at least 278,000 based upon $660 billion spent. of course, that number per job increases dramatically and rapidly if you include the interest paid on that stimulus bill which takes us over the $1 trillion mark. that sort of approach is not going to work, and if we open our eyes we can all honestly admit it. increasing unemployment is not going to decrease the federal debt our deficit. we have to grow our way out of this. a bill i introduced and several colleagues in a bipartisan way have signed on as co-sponsors and i ask my colleagues to join on as co-sponsors would be h.r. 1861. this bill would allow us to say instead of sending $129 billion a year to opec for foreign aid to buy their oil we drill for and we use our own. it would yield somewhere between $2.2 trillion and 3.7

trillion over a 30-year period in federal revenues. not from raising taxes but from using the standard royalties and lease agreements that come from this. it starts out as increases to a -- as a crawl and increases to a stroll and then a walk and then a run. it's putting our money where our jobs are. it leads to 1.2 million jobs annually based upon estimates of the american energy alliance. that's jobs making steel, style pipe, wire, software, technology. it's job for the rough next, the steelworkers, the electricians and laborers who work on these rigs. it's jobs for those who takes this oil and converts it into gasoline and it's jobs for those who have to put together all the infrastructure to make that happen. beyond that, we have to dedicate these funds into the infrastructure which america needs. according to the american society of civil engineers, many states find that 25% of the roads and bridges are

structurally deficient. that's unsafe. but for every $1 billion we spend on our infrastructure, it yields 38,000 jobs. those jobs are operating engineers and laborers and carpenters or electricians and engineers and those who make concrete and steel and all the things that go what we need for our roads, our highways, our locks, our dams, our sewer systems. let's grow our way back to prosperity. let's stop saying we're going to send money to opec and watch them grow. let's stop just pointing fingers and blaming and complaining about china. we have the tools here in america to make this happen. . while our leaders over at the white house arguing over how to take care of the debt debt. let's not forget americans are saying grow more jobs, grow more taxpayers, not find ways of taxing them. we can do this. again i ask my colleagues to join me in h.r. 1861 where we

can do this. let's not talk about jobs, let's not complain about it americans know when the wool is being pulled over their eyes and americans know when they are working. let's truly help them out and get jobs back on the table. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: madam speaker, in april of the year 2004, my staff came to me with a memo asking if i wanted to give a special order speech on some issue that i can't remember the subject. my answer at that time was no. i didn't want to speak on that issue. but i did want to deliver a five-minute speech that day and every day thereafter when it was possible to express my opposition to the wars in iraq and afghanistan. and my belief that there is a smarter way to achieve our national security goals.

and so, madam speaker, since that day i stood here in this spot to say over and over again that these wars are eroding our spiritual core. bankrupting us morally and fiscally. teaching our children that warfare is the new normal. i have delivered these speeches as a member of the majority and the minority when the president was a member of my party and when he was not, and today i am doing it for the 400th time. when i began the war in iraq was still quite popular. as was the president who launched it. but we spoke out anyway, refusing to bend on principle because we knew that we did not belong there. my colleagues, representative barbara lee and representative maxine waters and i, we called ourselves the triad, started the out of iraq caucus.

we first -- forced the first house vote to bring our troops home. along the way i visited iraq, i tried and i learned on that trip and my opinion was confirmed against that very war, but at the same time it increased my admiration for our troops. gradually the tide of public opinion has turned. president bush lost the confidence of the american people and eventually had to start winding down the war. i don't believe that would have happened unless a few lonely voices had dared to be heard in those early, early days. i'm proud of what we have accomplished, but i'm also very frustrated because nearly a decade after the first american boots hit the ground in afghanistan, here we are, still at war, still occupying sovereign countries on missions that aren't making us safer or

advancing our interests. the cost has been devastating. over 6,100 americans are dead. a thousand more civilians have died for the cause of their so-called liberation. thousands of u.s. service members have come home but may never be the same, either because of physical wounds or mental health trauma, which can with the physical and mental health destroy lives just as well. in addition to the staggering $3.2 trillion price tag that has piled up over the last 10 years, i don't think we have even begun to come to grips with the resources that the v.a. will need for the next 50 or so years to meet the responsibility we have to our veterans as a result of these wars. madam speaker, you know, i have said it over and over again, that i'm not suggesting we abandon the people of afghanistan and iraq.

anti-war doesn't mean anti-engagement or anti-security . the underlying principle behind my 400 speeches has been that we need a completely different approach to protecting america. one that emphasizes diplomacy, reconciliation, and peaceful conflict resolution. from the beginning i have been pushing my own solution called smart security. fighting terrorism with better intelligence, with a stronger nuclear nonproliferation program, with humanitarian and economic aid that will give hope to the people around the world. with less spending on weapons systems and more on homeland security, human rights monitoring, and energy independence. most importantly, smart security insists that war is an absolute last resort. because, madam speaker, for the sake of the future of the human race, the future of the human race, we must and we can figure

out a way to resolve our differences without resorting to war and violence. i will continue to do this for the remaining year and a half i will be in congress, giving as many of these speeches as i can. and madam speaker, i will not rest until we finally bring our troops home and we adopt the smart security approach to preventing war and preserving peace. so that my grandchildren and your grandchildren and their grandchildren will have a peaceful, productive world to live in in the future. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from louisiana, mr. landry, for five minutes. mr. landry: madam speaker, let me help this body interpret how the american people see this debt crisis. some of you may question how can i with this accent provide an

interpretation. let me show you, americans have a keen understanding of how credit cards work. they know that each card holds a limit on it. and this limit is the borrowing limit on that particular card. and it is a fact when one reaches the limit on his or her card, that they are unable to borrow more money or charge more at that time. now, it is not factual to say, however, that one -- when one maxes out his credit card that he is in default personally or laymen's term, he is bankrupt. when one reaches his limit, you simply cannot use the card anymore. if you want to continue to use the card, you need to pay down on the principal amount that is owed. now, if and when you reach this unfortunate circumstance, you and your family are required to live within your means. as long as you can continue to pay the interest on the card,

and the bills that you have accrued, then you are not in jeopardy of defaulting. of course you can only do this if you are employed and have income. unlike the approximately 9.2% of americans out there who are looking for us to do everything we can to help create private sector jobs. so this is where we are. look, i don't believe if we fail to read -- raise the debt ceiling that we will default. what i do believe is not raising the debt ceiling will finally require congress to make the tough decisions necessary to restore fiscal sanity to our federal government. it will force congress to understand that at this time we need to live within our means. why? because going back to our layman's term, if the federal government was person, that person is not unemployed. they still have a job. unlike the approximately 9.2% of americans i spoke earlier about.

so if we still have a job, that means we are still getting a paycheck. that paycheck is currently sufficient to pay our bills. after two years with the president and previous congresses spent like they were going out of style, the president is starting to understand that we have spent too much. what he hasn't realized yet and i hope he does, is that we don't have a revenue problem here. we have a spending problem. now, i know that we would like to spend more on things we like. that is human nature. but the reason so many of us are opposed to increasing taxes is that our constituents are opposed to increasing taxes. make no mistake about it. if the american people believe that an increase in taxes would once and for all eliminate our debt problems here in this country, they would support it. but you see, this institution has a credibility problem. in fact, the entire federal government has a credibility

problem with the american people. the american people do not have confidence in our ability to be prudent with their tax dollars. do you blame them? when over the course of the last two years we spent over $3 trillion on money -- on stimuluses and bailouts, promises we would increase their opportunity to be more financially secure, and of course that didn't happen. the prove is in the pudding. we spent the money and guess what? no results. we have a spending problem. why? because so many politicians here who have been here for a long time believe that everything in the budget is a need. not a want. as a parent of a young child i'm constantly having to explain to him the difference between needs and wants. so the long-time politicians here believe that government is the solution to everything. well, my friends, believe you me

some of us know it's not. and the vast majority of people know it's not. trust me. trust me. we need to, we must get serious. washington is not an elastic piggy bank that is able to continue to fund everyone's wants. let's get serious, let's quit spending what we don't have. let's restore credibility, and we do this by cutting spending through prioritizing. it is that simple. restore credibility. restore trust. get down to creating certainty, reducing red tape, and creating jobs. thank you, madam speaker. i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. rangel, for five minutes. mr. rangel: thank you, madam speaker. my colleagues, last week i tried to point out that there was a serious meeting going on in the

white house last weekend between the president and our congressional leaders to point out that we were facing a serious crises and that we had to do something to make certain that the president felt secure that we would increase the debt ceiling and that we would make certain that we did stop this unnecessary spending and of course, the question of every news, has always been a part of the debate. what i was trying to do was to point out that on one side it appeared the issue was that we shouldn't tax those people that created jobs. and these are people as people pointed out who are the wealthiest corporation that have record profits and of course the wealthy that have really have the lowest tax rates and have received more money in the last decade than in the history of the country. and i was really trying to say

that since the vulnerable and poor did not have any lobbyists or voices to debate this issue, that when we talk about entitlements, when we talk about social security and medicare and medicaid, these are not just political labels. the medicaid, of course we are talking about the vulnerable, the poor, and those who are sick. medicare, we are talking about the agents that need help. i was also pointing out that unfortunately social security has become the main income for so many americans. and we have veterans that are coming home. we have the jobless, the homeless, the hopeless, and that even though they did not have a lobbyist to say, hey, i want to have a seat at that table, that i call to all of our spiritual leaders since i knew that in every religion there was a good

samaritan aspect which ended up saying just do the right thing. i didn't put politics into that. i didn't put party labels into it. and i wasn't just talking to christians and ministers and catholics and protestants. i was reaching out to the rabbis, to the buddhists, to the moremans, to the muslims in saying that in every scripture, every religious document taking care of the vulnerable in those who can't take care of themselves that that moral issue should be on the table. well, as a result of that some people thought that instead of just the good samaritan i would ask what jesus would do. and i just want to make it clear, i haven't the slightest idea what he would do, but my very dear friend, governor huckabee, said one of the things that jesus would do would be to pay his taxes. and of course that was something

that reminded me he also went to deuteronomy and he cited it on tv, for the lord your god would bless you as he promised and he would lend many nations, but would borrow from none. and you would rule over many nations but none would rule over you. well, again, that scored -- that's good for the good governor, but, however, when you got a $14.3 trillion debt, it's kind of late for that message to have a strong impact. . but what i want to make clear is, no matter what religion you are, it appears to me that what we're talking about are two sides of sincere americans that do recognize that this is not just saying that the sky may fall. all economists agree that their

various ways to do it, and we cannot just cut back spending in order to resolve this serious economic problem we have. as a matter of fact, we have to be very sensitive when we do cut back spending that we don't create an addition to the unemployment and those that provide services to the disadvantaged. and i'm talking specifically about our hospitals, about our social workers because there's no one in this chamber that doesn't believe that the homeless and the sick, those that are disabled and those that are dependent on these programs should be ignored as we protect those people who for whatever reason have not participated in the creation of those jobs, even though we are all waiting, but more importantly, we have not heard any complaints from the wealthiest of americans that more equity should be involved in our taxing system. when the billionaires can say

that their secretaries have a higher tax rate than they do, it means that we have a responsibility not to raise taxes but at least to close the inequity that exists that would raise revenue. so when we do get home, it seems to me that we would say this is not a democratic issue, this is not a republican issue alone, it is a moral issue. thank you, governor huckabee. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, for five minutes. mr. thompson: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to recognize and honor a true patriot, humanitarian and all-around great american. colonel gerald f. russell, united states marine corps. colonel russell is a combat veteran of korea, the cuban missile crisis and world war ii, including the battle of iwo jima which is a similar knoll

event in our history. i use time to celebrate our service to our country. mr. speaker, may 1, 1916 was the beginning of a long life of service. in 1940, colonel gerald f. russell graduated from boston college and enlisted in the first u.s. marine corps office and was commissioned the second lieutenant of the united states marine corps. he was assigned to the 11th marines, paris island, south carolina, and then promoted to first lieutenant. in september, 1942, colonel russell land in the assault waves in the first offense of world war ii. he was promoted to captain the very same day. assigned as battery commander of the ship and hit by japanese aircraft during landing which later sank. colonel russell suffered shrapnel wounds during the campaign, was not evacuated and soon contracted malaria.

shortly thereafter he moved to melbourne, australia and then moved to the u.s. to recovery. from 1943 to 194r5 he was assigned to attend the u.s. marine corps college. he was assigned to the fifth marine division, camp lejeune, as artillery exhe can. promoted to infantry. with the fifth marine division he transferred to hawaii as infantry battalion officer. he landed on the third assault wave of iwo jima. despite wounds to his face and being evacuated, russell volunteered to stay and lead the battalion after his commander went down. on the 10th day, russell was elevated to infantry battalion commander, one of the youngest in world war ii and served for the remainder of the campaigned. he commanded one of two units who landed in japan for occupation. he provided protection for the

teams covered the atomic bomb sites in nagasaki. he was then returned to the u.s. and was assigned to the staff officer's basic school in quantico, virginia, where he served as instructor. in 1949 russell was assigned to the first marine division korea where he served as commander, frontline infantry about a tanyon for nine months and served as the korean marine brigade for eight months. when he returned to the u.s. he was assigned to the marine corps research and development staff in quantico, virginia. in 1952, russell was assigned as staff u.s. european command, paris, france. that year he returned to headquarters in washington, d.c., and later transferred to quantico assigned as director of the amphibious warfare school, was part of the eighth infantry regimen. he went to guantanamo bay,

cuba, during the early days of difficulty with cuba. he was transferred to headquarters marine in washington, d.c., where he was part of morale services until his retirement of the marine corps in 1968. he retired on a friday and started work on monday as the assistant to the provost at penn state university. while at penn state, he served as assistant to the provost, assistant secretary for the penn state board of trustees. assistant professor and assistant dean -- to the dean of college of health and physical education and an associate dean until his retirement in 1987. since retirement of penn state, he served as a tireless community volunteer and known throughout central pennsylvania and beyond. today, colonel russell is part of the board of directors, chairman of the united way, and remains active in various efforts including the pennsylvania special olympics,

toys for tots. after a long and distinguished career, colonel russell has received the public korea distinguished medal, the army commendation medal, purple heart med two gold stars, u.s. presidential citation with four stars, the korean citation with three navy stars, the defense medal, the pacific medal with three stars, world war ii victory medal, world war ii japan occupation medal. among others for his service to our country. a decorated veteran with almost three decades of active service, today, colonel russell is one of just three living regimental commanders of iwo jima. after capturing iwo jima, u.s. forces were able to have a staging ground for the aerial assault to help defeat the japanese empire. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

mr. thompson: i want to thank colonel russell for his service and to this great nation. happy birthday, colonel russell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. lee, for five minutes. ms. lee: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today first of all to pay tribute to a true champion for peace and justice, congresswoman lynn woolsey. her leadership is reflected in the fact that today marks the 400th occasion on which she has spoken on the house floor against the ongoing war in iraq and the war in afghanistan. today is really a landmark, not only because of congresswoman woolsey's outstanding commitment to ending the wars we are engaged in, but also because she's my good friend and she will be retiring at the end of this term. i was truly honored to be by her side when she announced her retirement after 20 years of bold and visionary service in

this house and serving her district. it was a bittersweet occasion, but i know she will do wonderful things in the next chapter of her life. congresswoman woolsey should really be commended for being an unparalleled leader and a guiding light, a truly guiding light in congress for peace, for smart security and for justice. madam speaker, i would also like to thank congresswoman woolsey for her unwavering leadership and commitment to end the unsustainable wars in iraq and afghanistan. she introduced the very first resolution calling for us to bring our young brave men and women home from iraq. i believe she pulled together then 130 votes, maybe, for that resolution, and i want to remind you, this was a time when this body was quite frankly very timid in its opposition to the war. she broke that silence, and i have to thank you for that very

historic moment, congresswoman woolsey. now, we must ensure that the 45,000 united states troops and our military contractors who remain in iraq leave the country at the -- leave iraq at the end of this year as stated in our national status of forces agreement with iraq. congresswoman woolsey's fight to end these wars is directly tied to really the impasse that we're facing over our nation's debt limit, which we're discussing today. she has tirelessly reminded this body time and time again that in order to pay for these wars, the united states has taken on incredible debt. this reckless spending and resulting debt are now being used by many in a dangerous political game which thritens the economic future of our country. a-- threatens the economic future of our country. allowing this nation to default on our legal obligations would threaten every american's

economic security, it would devastate people's retirement savings and it would cripple an already struggling housing market. the truth is, and congresswoman woolsey always reminds us of this, raising the debt ceiling should be a simple thing. this should be a straightforward vote to allow the united states treasury to fund all of the programs and obligations of the entire federal government that is already in law. very simple. republicans in the house have already passed a $9 trillion increase in the national debt. and now instead of working to fund the programs that they already voted to authorize, republicans are playing a high stakes game of chicken and the safety and security of every single american so they protect the massive tax breaks for the superrich, big oil and, of course, hedge funds. they've taken an ircreditably irresponsible position protecting tax breaks for the superrich and wall street is more important than protecting the united states government and main street from defaulting on our debt.

and, again, congresswoman woolsey has been a leader in protecting social security. and i want to remind all of us today that social security and medicare did not create the national debt. and that is really unconscionable to ask our most vulnerable communities to be the ones who must bear the burden of balancing our budgets. it was republicans who told us that the financial markets would regulate themselves. in return, what did we get, the financial crisis. it's the republican politicians who keep telling us that tax cuts pay for themselves and create jobs. in return, we have a huge deficit and an unacceptable unemployment rate. and it was republicans who told us that we could fight two wars while giving more tax breaks to their rich friends. of course, congresswoman woolsey for years and years and years had reminded us that first of all the wars did not need to be fought but, secondly, they were morally and fiscally wrong. in return, now we'll end up paying a cost of nearly $6

trillion by borrowing the money and adding this to the tally of our nation's debt. and now, unfortunately, republicans are blaming their debts on the most vulnerable americans. even now they continue to drive our nation closer and closer to the brink of disaster just to protect massive tax breaks for billionaires. so once again, let me just say in closing, i'm proud to stand here with congresswoman woolsey as a member of the triadd. she's working to end our nation's words. will to do so to protect our national security, children, working families and most vulnerable americans. thank you, congresswoman woolsey. we owe you a debt of gratitude. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones, for five minutes. mr. jones: madam speaker, thank you for the recognition. i'm on the floor today, i think america and all of us in congress are sorely concerned about the debt ceiling issue and what we're going to do and how we're going to be able to

resolve it. but i, like many of my colleagues, spearkly on the democratic side, i'm -- especially on the democratic side, i'm here to talk about the war in afghanistan. madam speaker, i have at the side me a really profound photograph of a wife in tears and a little girl sitting on her knee who is too young to understand that her father, united states army jeffrey sheer, lay under the flag that is now folded, being presented to the wife. this is the pain of war. and i do say to ms. woolsey, thank you very much for what you've done to try to wake up the congress and the american people. $10 billion a month. we can't even fix the bridges. we can't fix the roads. we cutting children programs, we're cutting senior programs.

and yet, mr. karzai, who is known as a corrupt leader of afghanistan, he's going to get his $10 billion a month while these programs that we're going to cut are going to be denied $10 billion a month. it doesn't make any sense, madam speaker. that brings me to an article written by a.c. snow, he's well-known in north carolina where i'm from in his writings in the state paper in rawleigh, north carolina. and this past july 4 his article was tiled "time to bring them home, let them live." . time to bring them hope, let let this little girl's father live. obviously he will not live. he's dead. but how about the next little girl or the little boy or the wife and in some cases the husband?

let me share with the house from a.c. snowe's writing, "time to bring them home, let them live." it seems we never run out of wars. it is as if one small country after another sends out an engraved invitation reading, we're having a war. please come. and uncle sam goes lugging, borrowing billions and thousands of young men and women to sacrifice on the altar of so-called freedom or nation building. snowe closes his comments by quoting lyrics from "les miserables." i quote. he is young. he is only a boy. you can take, you can give. let him be. let him live. bring him home. bring him home. snowe further writes, it is way past time to stop playing politics with the lives of

american youth. bring them home, let them live. not just 30,000 of them, but all of them. madam speaker, i sit here day after day, committees, and on the floor of the house, listen to debates, sometimes being part of the debate, and i just hope the american people will understand that in this discussion at the white house with the leadership of the house and the leadership of the senate, we could save $100 billion, that's what it costs per year to be in afghanistan, and, madam speaker, i have camp lejeune marine base in my district. over over 60,000 retired military. i listened to them. no, i did not serve. but i listened to those who are serving and those who did serve and like my colleagues, i go to walter reed, i go to bethesda, i see the broken bodies, amputated legs, paralyzed, and i have yet

written over 10,300 letters to families like sergeant shear to say to the families, i regret that i voted to send our kids into iraq. it was a lie that got us there and we never should have gone. so i join my colleagues in both parties to do my part, to say let's bring them home from afghanistan. let's bring them home before 2014 or 2015. madam speaker, may god bless our men and women in uniform and may god bless america. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new mexico, mr. heinrich, for five minutes. mr. heinrich: -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut, mr. himes. mr. himes: thank you, madam speaker. i'd like to thank my republican colleague from north carolina for that very powerful statement.

and i'm very glad that congresswoman woolsey was in the chamber to hear that. who has worked so hard to remind us of the terrible consequences ever war. i often sit here as we debate and see from time to time the statements of our republican colleagues. that was profoundly moving. i thank the gentleman from north carolina. i stand today, madam speaker, to talk on another issue that should unite our parties. and that is the fundamental question about whether or not the united states honors its commitments. today is july 12, exactly three weeks before august 2. august 2 is the date at which this government can no longer honor its commitments. at which it will be forced to choose between paying those soldiers that we heard so movingly described, and sending out social security checks. running a court system, paying social security and medicare.

do we honor our commitments in the united states of america? i would think that both parties would say yes to that question. the treasury secretary, c.e.o.'s of american corporations, economists after economist have told us, do not play around with the debt ceiling. what is this debt ceiling, by the way, that is putting into peril the question of whether we honor our commitments? the debt ceiling is a pernicious fiction. it is a fiction that was put in place by this body decades ago to try to convince the american people that we could control our debt. and since then it has never done that. it has been raised, dozens of times, as this body took the spending decisions and the tax cut decisions that required borrowing. under the bush administration, the debt ceiling was raised seven times. dozens and dozens of times the debt ceiling has been raised. it is a fiction. it is a particularly pernicious

set of smoke and mirrors that this institution uses to make people feel better while the debt rideses as -- rideses -- rises as it did under president reagan, under the first president bush, as it did not under president clinton and as it did under president george w. bush, and president obama. now the question is do we honor the commitments made historically in this chamber? we raise the debt ceiling not to spend more new money to start new programs or to cut new taxes but because we honor the commitments that were made in this chamber. to cut taxes in 2001 and 2003, to go to war, twice, in the last decade, to add an expensive new drug ben knit in medicare. these are all things people supported but we committed to do them as a body. and you cannot make those decisions, you cannot vote to lower taxes or to increase spending and then turn around and say i'm not going to pay for

that. that is the worst sort of hypocrisy. i'm glad that my friend from louisiana, mr. landry, talked about credit cards, but he got it a little bit wrong. the debt ceiling is sort of like a credit card, but what we are talking about right now because we are talking about paying for past decisions and commitments, would be if i wasn't to the electronic store and bought myself a big screen tv and i bought myself a new microwave and i bought myself a new home security system, and then i get home and a month later and i get the credit card bill, hum, i don't know if i'm going to pay this credit card bill. i took the decisions, i made the commitments, and now the time has come to honor those commitments. do we act as stewards of one of the best assets this country has? our full faith and credit. the belief that the united states honors its commitments. this is a critical asset, particularly now at a time of great economic uncertainty. do we act as stewards of that

full faith and credit, or do we use the debt ceiling as a gun to the head to say unless you do x, y, and z, unless you cut $2 trillion or $3 trillion we won't raise the debt ceiling which is what we are hearing from the republican side today. do you use it? do you hold it hostage? the full faith and credit of the united states. that is what we are seeing today. there is no question we need to address the deficit. we need to address the long-term sustainability of medicare and social security. in an equitable way. we should do that. this president has basically put everything on the table. including making some of my colleagues on the democratic side very uncomfortable with social security and medicare, but he has put them on the table because there can be no sacred cows unless you are john boehner or a republican and not everything is on the table. because we won't put the immense amount of spending we do for the tax code for advantages for oil companies, for advantages for big agriculture, for all sorts of tax breaks for corporations and others, we won't even talk about that.

my friends, this comes down to the question of do we honor our commitments? and the answer to that question must be yes. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. coble, for five minutes. mr. coble: thank you, madam speaker. this week, madam speaker, i will introduce a bill that will amend the rules applicable to participation in the congressional pension plan. under the present plan a member upon completion of five years' service, the pension vests. i believe a member should make a more firm commitment to become eligible and therefore become eligible to participate in the plan. my bill, madam speaker, will increase the eligibility requirement from five years to 12 years. the bill if enacted will become

effective at the convenienting of the 113th congress. a member could serve six two-year house terms, two six-year senate terms, or a combination thereof to become eligible to participate in the congressional pension plan. if any colleagues are interested in my proposal, i will welcome co-sponsors to the bill and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva. mr. grijalva: thank you, madam speaker. i'm here to join with my colleagues in thanking the gentlelady from california, ms. woolsey, for all that she has done to provide leadership on an issue that has been critical to the american people. on an issue that she could very

justifiably say i told you so. and since i have been in this house, it's been my distinct privilege to consider her a friend and to enjoy the leadership and the insight that she has provided to many of us. her position on afghanistan is correct and a necessary position as we see these times before us. americans who feel the sting of doing more with less with connecting the dots between federal spending priorities and the pain that they are feeling at home right now. americans struggling to put their kids through college without any pell grants or running out of unemployment benefits with no new job on the horizon cannot ignore the cost of this war. the war costs the taxpayers in my congressional district more than $580 million so far. that's about 11,000 elementary schoolteachers that could be

hired for a year or 84,000 students that could go to community college or a university or a trade school or a career school. these are just some of the bad tradeoffs we are making by spending our national resources on a war instead of fixing the problems that we have here at home. ask yourself, which would you rather have, a war that is not making us safer and not worth the cost, or a more educated, prosperous america? we cannot afford the nearly $10 billion per month while families struggle to stay afloat and the slow recovery of our nation continues. keeping america safe does not require 100,000 troops in afghanistan. al qaeda is no longer in afghanistan but scattered across the world. it did not take 100,000 troops to find osama bin laden, and it does not take a military occupation of afghanistan to protect us from terrorist threats. i am deeply proud of the hard

work and incredible sacrifice of our brave men and women in uniform. we know they are carrying out the mission in afghanistan with dedication and extraordinary competence. throughout this nearly 10-year military campaign, they have done all we have asked of them and represented our nation's very best values and ideals. now it's time to bring our troops home. and bring them home to a new reality. since the year 2000 we have lost two million jobs in this country while we have added 30 million people to our population. after 10 years of a failed fiscal policy that brags about job creators through tax cuts, incentives, subsidies to corporations, this failed policy of -- continues to be promoted as the solution to our economy and to the recession that we find ourselves in. we need to bring our troops home. we need to integrate them fully back into our society and into

our country. and one of the best ways to do that is to provide jobs and opportunity. and one way for the government to create jobs in public service and public works, by putting america back to work, we begin to crawl out of the hole that we have been in for the last 10 years. afghanistan is a stark example of flawed priorities. and as we go forward with the discussion of the debt ceiling, with how to balance this budget, how to articulate priorities that the american people want, let us not forget that one of the priorities the american people have insisted on time and time again is to end these two misadventures in iraq and afghanistan, bring those troops home, redirect those resources to the needs that the american people face right now, and in this way begin not only to make our economy better, but return some moral imperative to this nation. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. quayle, for five minutes. mr. quayle: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, last friday's jobs report was incredibly disappointing. we only added 18,000 jobs to the u.s. economy. our unemployment rate went up to 9.2%. not to mention the fact that we had a downgrade, a revision of last month's -- of may's job report to only 25,000 jobs. . the deeper you go in that jobs report the worse it gets. for those unplanned parenthood that's about 16% to 17% of the united states population. and that is not even including the 250,000 people who were part of the unplanned parenthood because they stopped looking for work. we've been talking about jobs for a long time. you hear it all the time in the halls of congress.

what have we done? now, the house has passed a number of bills that would immediately open up the marketplace for job creation and job growth. but unfortunately our friends on the other side of the alcohol in the senate have done -- side of the capitol in the senate have done nothing to advance these pieces of legislation. they haven't passed a budget in over 800 days. i would ask our friends in the senate to start to push these economic policies so we can get americans back to work. but it's not just our friends on the other side of the capitol that is holding us back. it's the administration's pursued policies that's hurt economic combrothe. to be a good executive you have to be able to do two things well. one, is to be able to analyze and pinpoint a problem. and the second part is to find a solution for that problem. unfortunately, we have an administration that doesn't even do the first part well.

they actually pinpoint problems that don't exist or problems that aren't problems at all. so you can't get to a solution that will get americans back to work. i'll give you a couple examples of this. recently the president said one of the problems we have with job creation are with a.t.m.'s and kiosks at our airports. now, i didn't know about the scourge of a.t.m.'s and kiosks but apparently those are holding back our job creators. this is called innovation. this is called efficiency. and it reminds me of the story when the famed economist, milton friedman, went to china and he wants witnessing some building of a can national. they said, why don't you use bulldozers? these things will make it more efficient. the chinese officials said, we couldn't put these people to work. to that milton friedman responded, why don't you give them spoons? look, innovation and efficiency

make our country stronger. they're net job creators so we should be going after what is really holding our country back and really is holding back economic growth and that is the nlrv who is attacking american jobs who want to create american jobs. that's the e.p.a. who is going after numerous pieces of legislation that will in the near term kill jobs, in the medium term kill jobs and in the long term kill jobs. we should be going after the f.t.c. who is going of a captain crunch and tony the tiger. those are holding our country back and holding back economic growth. we should be looking at those burdening regulations and removing that and letting our entrepreneurs and/or job creators unleash the ingenuity that they have within them. this is' one agreement i do have with the president and that is with the free trade agreements. with south korea, colombia and panama need to be passed through the house. but we got to agree on

something. they have been sitting on the president's desk since he's been in office. so i urge the president to send those free trade agreements without any additional spending attached to them because those are job creators. for every $1 billion worth of exports, it's 10,000 jobs here at home. so i really hope that the administration starts to pinpoint and look at the real problems that our country's facing so we can get america back to work and we can lead to more economic growth and prosperity because it starts with the american worker. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, for five minutes. mr. garamendi: i thank you, madam speaker. i was just kind of curious about which one of those e.p.a. regulations that my colleague was talking about. perhaps it's the one that would prevent the emission of mercury into the air or arsenic into

the water. maybe they want to poison the air and the water. maybe that's what they're looking at. or the f.c.c. regulation that would bring to heel wall street and all of its excesses -- or the s.e.c. regulation that would bring to heel wall street and all of its excesses. in any case, what i'd like to talk about here is the negotiations that are under way to deal with the looming crisis of the debt. the president of the united states has said, ok, let's not kick the can down the road any further. let's deal with this issue and has proposed a $4 trillion solution. no sooner did he make that proposal than our republican colleagues said, oh, no, we can't do that because that will include finally creating an america a fair tax code. one in which the superwealthy are actually going to get to pay for their share of the burden.

for example, the hedge fund managers that pay a 15% rate on their earnings, their ordinary income while the rest of us get to pay the full freight. whatever that might be, 35% for those at the top brackets. but, oh, no, we can't give that. we can't deal with that problem. so we can't have a $4 trillion solution. the president also said, we're not going to kick the can down the road. we want to extend the debt limit to at least 2013 to put this issue off, but the republican don't want to do that. they want to do it short term. i wonder what's going on here. talk about cuts, the only cut that i've seen thus far from the -- defined by our republican colleagues is to cut medicare. in fact, not just cut it, terminate medicare. somehow take all of those americans that are 55 years or younger and say to them that, no, when you become 65 you will

not have medicare. we'll give you a voucher and you can go out -- out and take your best shot with the private insurance sector. good luck. i was insurance commissioner. i know what those private insurance companies will do. they'll deny you benefits, deny you coverage and they'll tell the doctor exactly what you might actually receive in terms of health care. doesn't make much sense to me. i think we need to support the president in this matter. i think we need a balanced approach here, one in which the wealthy finally get to pay their fair share, in which the oil companies no longer receive our hard-earned tax dollars so that they can have their $4 billion subsidy. i think it's time, as we heard earlier from our colleague, that it's time to end the wars. we end the war in afghanistan we could over the next four, five years have a third of a

trillion-dollar reduction in our deficit. there are many things that could be done. but one thing we will not do is to attack social security. social security and medicare are the foundation of support for all americans. when they become old, 65 and older, they know that they have that benefit available to them, and medicare works. medicare is actually far more efficient than any private insurance -- health insurance system. it has provided seniors across this nation with the opportunity to not be impoverished when they become 65, that their health care will be provided to them. it has allowed for the extension of their lives. it has reduced the poverty rate. together with social security, these are two of the foundations that we have promised every american. when they become 65 they will not face poverty. they will have a foundation. not enough to provide all that

they might want but at least a foundation. so as we go through this whole issue of whether we're going to raise the debt limit or not, let us be mindful that we will not do it on the backs of the seniors, and we will do it in a balanced way as the president has said. we will provide for a fair tax code in which the superwealthy pay their fair share, in which corporations are no longer able to evade taxes, in which the oil companies no longer will receive our hard-earned tax dollars so they can have even greater pofts. and let us be mindful that the oil industry itself over the last 10 years has had the top five oil companies have had over $1 trillion of profits. it's time to bring back those subsidies and to balance our budget. we can do these things. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr.

shilling, for five minutes. mr. shilling: thank you, madam speaker. i come before the floor of the house this morning to talk about the top issues of the illinois 17th congressional district and that is the debt limit. the debt limit has been raised 51 times since 1978. mr. geithner has indicated that doing the same things over and over again is insanity. i tend to agree with him. where are we at today? $14.2 trillion in debt. we reached the debt limit on may 16 of 2011. it's time -- business owners, such as myself, share a message with people. it's time that we did the responsible thing and come up with some solutions so we continue -- so that we stop the continuance of leaving this debt to our kids and our

grandkids. as a small business owner, i'm asking president obama not to balance the budget on the backs of the small businesses across the united states of america. you know, the thing that i understand as a small business owner is that in a downturn economy the worst thing we can do here from washington, d.c., is to raise taxes on small businesses. and the reason why, and i use my business as an example, is in a downturn economy i understand that raising prices on my product when people are already struggling to purchase a product is not the best thing to do. when my taxes go up i can raise the price or i can let someone go. and you know, as hard as it is to let someone go, that's what businesses will have to do because folks won't be able to afford their product. we need to try a different way. that's why we're promoting a

new train of thought. here in washington, d.c., the 87 members of congress have changed the thought process of washington, d.c. we've changed the thought process from how much can we spend to how much can we cut. what we've also done is we're trying to get washington, d.c., to focus in on wants versus needs and then prioritizing those out. the president has even admitted that the overregulations need to be addressed. whether it's the e.p.a., osha, the overtaxing, the 1099 tax form that we just got repealed, the small business administration says that businesses like my little pizzeria in moline spends twice as much per employee to comply for environmental regulations than bigger employees. we spend 10 times more employee

on tax compliance than that of the large businesses. congress needs to provide an environment with some economic certainties. we can do this by stopping tax increases on our job creators. my home state of illinois, and quite frankly, president obama's state of illinois recently had the largest tax increase in the history of the state. it seems like every morning you open up the paper in illinois, another business is threatening to leave. we can do something about this. we can provide our job creators with the certainty that with the unemployment rate at 9.2% we don't need to add any more tax burden or further any more overregulation. with that i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, mississippi norton, for five minutes. -- ms. norton, for five minutes.

ms. norton: madam chair, i do want to acknowledge my good friend, lynn woolsey, for 20 really illustrious years in the congress. i cannot imagine why she would want to end her illuss russ career here so early. we will all miss her. i should warn -- i should warn members of congress that a peculiar part of the financial services appropriation, which comes to the floor this week, will seem particularly strange. even inappropriate. it is a historical aknack rowmism. we need to start off the 21st century on the district of columbia local budget. it's our local budget. we are american citizens. some have said, but the district of columbia comes under the constitution. so be it, i am a constitutional lawyer. i can see that. but in their wisdom, after 150

years of shame, the congress of the united states decided to grant home rule, as we call it, to the district of columbia so that instead of having hundreds of thousands of americans run by a federal body, the congress said we delegate, we use our power under the constitution to delegate to the district of columbia the ability to elect its local officials, raise its own money. we were doing that all along. spend its own money. for the most part congress has adhered to that. after all, we raised $4 billion. that's more than some states. . it is the very essence of the principal federalism embraced by both sides of this -- of the aisle of this body. it has what's held the union together. so we have acknowledged different strokes for different

folks. and as if to reinforce that principle, a new crop of republicans have come with federalism as a virtual original principle, giving new meaning to the notion of local control, indeed these new republicans want the federal government out of their own matters and turned back to the states. so i imagine that the whole notion of the big foot of the district of columbia in local matters would contiguously offend the new so-called -- particularly offend the new so-called tea party. the appropriation that will come before this body already intrudes on the district of columbia with one rider, a rider involving abortion services for local women. that's embedded in if. if that's congress holds that principle that certainly will be no more. the world saw the reaction when

the last time the congress tried to add attachments to the district appropriation. it was in the budget deal of 2011. at a time when people in the mideast were against the government, our government went in the streets and you saw elected officials from both the top of the government, both the executive and legislature, arrested and an act of civil disobedience because of the intrusion on the way the citizens of the district of columbia spend their own local money. the white house was not exempt. they have also gone to the white house and some have been arrested right there because the white house agreed to that deal at the very last minute. now a new national organization composed of national organizations themselves who have millions of members across the united states that are out to come to help us and they have sent letters to members of

congress saying you will not be able to anonymously, any more, engage in intrusion on local affairs of a local jurisdiction. we are activating our members to let them know if you intrude by voting for any attachment that takes away the ability of the district of columbia to spend its own local funds as it sees fit. local taxes, my friends, local issues. not your business. unless you raise the money. some of these issues are controversial. that also is the essence of federalism. we, of course, bough to the differences -- bow to the differences among us instead of trying to take away our right to embrace those differences. much better in your district is

much to raise the hairs of my own citizens. we are not going to deprive you of your rights. we ask you do not deprive us of ours. there will be consequences. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana, mr. rokita, for five minutes. mr. rokita: thank you, madam chair. i rise today to address the ongoing debt ceiling negotiations or so they are called. the debt crisis rpf currently facing our country is a great one, make no mistake. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff has called the debt the greatest threat to our national security. not iraq. not afghanistan. not al qaeda. but our debt. since january, 2009, $3.7 trillion has been added to the national debt. current our debt stands at $14.3 trillion. and i'm told if you add in the cost, the present day cost of all the promises that

irresponsible people who stood here before me have made to the american people, that the cost would be over $70 trillion. many americans, including this one, can't even conceptualize that. can't count that high. and that's not their fault. that's this body's fault. there's a lot of fear mongering going on by people who want us to spend more. they have seen these tactics work in the past. bank bailouts. massive spending bills. even if the calamity forecast was to come to pass, it doesn't change the fact that the debt crisis we face is our fiscal sin. generations before ours and ours are responsible for it. not my kids. not your kids. and not our grandchildren. and if addressing it hurts in the short term, then i say, so be it. i reject the idea that we would pass this mess on to our kids for supposed short-term economic or political gain. that is one of the most piggish

ideas i ever heard and it runs counter to the spirit that helped make this nation great, an exceptional nation. we own this mess. if we have to suffer a little bit in the short term to right our fiscal house in the long term, that's our duty. it's debt hurting the economy and don't forget the misguided big government ideas that have been implemented over the last 2 1/2 years. these debt ceiling negotiations are a great opportunity to enact monumental reform to the federal government making the future brighter for all americans, and the next two weeks, my colleagues, is critical. we can do it if we want to in a bipartisan fashion. we must seize the opportunity. it is more important we craft a deal that gets it right for the sake of our children and grandchildren than implement a false fix driven by short-term thinking. getting it right means enacting permanent and structural forms to the way washington spends. raising taxes is not necessary. and would only hurt the economy. our government doesn't tax too little. our government spends too much.

and by permanent structural i mean a balanced budget amendment. a balanced budget amendment would be hard for a future congress or a future president to change and would force the necessary things that cause us to live within our means again. in order to raise the debt ceiling, the price for that concession must be the passage of permanent and structural rye forms like the balanced budget amendment, period. there is no additional negotiation. there is no additional request. the request is raise the debt ceiling, $2 trillion. ok. let's do it, but if we do it, let's make sure it never has to be done again. the only way to do that is through permanent structural reforms like the balanced budget amendment. if the consequences are not raising the debt ceiling are as see as some suggest, surely we can find the common ground necessary to force the government to balanced the americans families every month. i'm excited. where does a legislative body have a chance to do something so

monumental and monumentally great. this would be among the most significant reforms in our nation's history. i don't know an opportunity to enact a balanced budget amendment will be within our reach again for a long time. i do know i have only been around for six months. and no matter how long i or others stay, i think we will look back on the next three weeks as one of the best opportunities we have ever had for making things better for our future for our posterity. and that ultimately is how we should look at every vote we take on this floor. not how it will benefit us in the here and now but how it will benefit our children's chances to inherit what we do. the greatest, most exceptional nation the world has ever known. i didn't come here to vote for us in the here and now. i came here to vote for our future. now is the time for bold, decisive action. now is the time for a balanced budget amendment. nothing short of the future of our children and grandchildren is at stake.

i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from ohio, ms. kaptur, for five minutes. ms. kaptur: thank you. madam speaker, america's so-called spending problem directly relates to unemployment. revenues just aren't growing fast enough because of unemployment. yet washington, d.c., is tied in knots over raising the debt limit. how much more america has to borrow because our economy isn't growing fast enough to put millions of americans back to work? but you can't balance a budget unless people are working. because unemployment equals loss of revenues and deficits. people know this. when they are out of work, they have deficits in their own family. they have to cut become. our local cool school systems have to cut back because we know revenues aren't there.

and certainly our nation has to cut back when the revenues aren't coming in. but many inside washington, d.c., have their eye on the effect not on the cause of our predicament. the principle cause of deficits is unemployment. triggered by what? triggered first by wall street corruption and greed? triggered by growing trade deficits which i will talk about in a second due to the outsourcing of u.s. jobs. and due to endless wars. america needs to address causes, but washington's addressing only effects. today we have again news that one of the principle causes of chronic unemployment and deficits is headed in the wrong direction. the united states trade deficit, our balance of accounts with other countries, is seriously hemorrhaging. in may the u.s. trade deficit grew again, more in the red, by over $50.2 billion. more lost jobs.

yes, the imports of higher priced oil keeps pushing all of america deeper into the red. people know it because they are paying over $4 a gallon when they fill up their car. i did that last night again. america has a jobs problem. and that triggers the red inc. -- red ink. america has a jobs problem. that triggers the red ink. in 1993 the people here in congress argue, oh, pass nafta. over my strong objections. because it's going to create millions of jobs. and we will have this terrific trade balance with mexico, exactly the reverse happened. we have over $1 trillion in trade deficit post nafta and there hasn't been a single year in which it has been balanced. millions of jobs lost, more red ink due to nafta. then in the late 1990's they said, let's sign the same kind of deal with china and we did. and guess what happened? millions more lost jobs in this

country. in fact, the manufacturing policy project estimates that there have been over 14 million jobs lost just in terms of nafta and permanent normal trade relations -- pntr. we can no longer afford to add hundreds of billions of dollars annually to our trade deficits because it throttles economic growth. it literally crushes it. it creates more unemployment in this country. and today we are facing unsustainable levels of unemployment for the third year since the recklessness of wall street brought the economy crushing down after gas prices went up to over $4 a gallon in 2007. the official unemployment rates today are over 9% and this causes red ink at every level. but rather than focusing on job creation, washington wants to give us more of these trade agreements, this time where south korea, colombia, and panama using the same trade model that has resulted in huge trade deficits and more lost jobs. we need to address causes.

we need to get our deficits under control by balancing our trade accounts. we need to get our deficits under control by putting people back to work. we need to get our deficits under control by ending endless wars, and we need to balance our accounts by making sure that also also and the greedy who are getting the free ride pay their fair share. america needs a trade policy that creates jobs here in our country with more exports going out and holds our trade partners accountable. we don't need more nafta trade model type agreements which is what they are going to try to push through again. madam speaker, america's deficit problem relates directly to lack of jobs. vast pools of unemployed people, americans who want to work but are losing hope, unemployment translates into red ink. and lack of revenue. until this congress addresses unemployment, it won't solve the deficit problem. america needs to address the

causes not the effects of america's economic predicament. when will this congress address those causes? madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. graves, for five minutes. mr. graves: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i rise today to remind my colleagues why we are here. we are here to represent our constituents and we are bound by an oath that we all took when we were sworn into office. each of us as we stood in this chamber we solemnly swore that we would support and defend the constitution of the united states. against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that we would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. that we would take this obligation freely without any reservation or purpose of evasion, and that we would well

and faithfully discharge the duties of this office in which we serve, so help us god. madam speaker, there's a constituent of mine, jack smith, he is a defender of the constitution and one of the strongest conservatives i know. jack never fails to sound the alarm when washington is off track when it comes to the constitution and i think we all know that comes quite often. it's very frequent. so whether it's a foreign or domestic enemy of the constitution, i stand committed to defend this document. . whenever and wherever i can. so in honor of jack and the ninth congressional district liberty council, i urge the members of this house, the senate, the office of president to reflect on your oath, to reflect on what you swore as you took that oath of office and the clear guidelines that

it and the constitution have bound us by. because the future of this great and glorious cause we call america depends on it. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. speier, for five minutes. ms. speier: thank you, madam speaker. for a number of months now i've come to the floor to tell the stories of men and women in the military who have been raped by other soldiers. as heinous as those assaults are, the greatest injustice is suffered after the assault, when victims are doubted, disrespected and discharged from the military that they have so proudly enlisted in. last night i had a long conversation with an army and navy veteran, terri odom, who told me she dreamed to serve in the military since she was a little girl. she was so determined that between her junior and senior

summer she went to boot camp, not to some playground area somewhere in her area but to boot camp. after high school she went to sicily with the c.b.'s. she told me she had never been happier serving her country, seeing the world, even swimming in the mediterranean. it was like terri was living a military recruiting commercial. while there she was befriended by an n.s.o. 25 years her senior. she was a father figure to terri and she trusted him explicitly. when he volunteered to walk her home one night, terri accepted the offer without hesitation. she told me that when he first grabbed her she was more confused than scared. this was a young woman who was very proud of her service and had the utmost respect for her colleague, particularly one who had such a distinguished career. this couldn't possibly be

happening. terri's story is graphic. i only tell you the details so you can understand how horrific the response has been from our military. terri was raped repeatedly. her abuser used pipes and other objects he found in her bathroom that was being remodeled. he cut her arms and vagina, then poured paint thinner into her wounds. he punched her for the full force of his 6'4", 270-pound frame. terri, it should be noted, is 5'3". she fought back. even did some damage. but she was outmatched. she woke up in the bathtub covered in blood. she was missing teeth and fingernails. yet, her first thought was she couldn't be late for duty. she also knew she could get medical attention and file a complaint at the base. surely the navy would take care of her. turns out she was wrong about that as she was about her rapist. terri cleaned herself up, showered and showed up for

duty. reported the rape to her chain in command. she requested medical attention but was told instead to take an aspirin and sleep it off. no one in terri's chain of command allowed her to get medical attention. instead, they told her to drop the rape story or her career would be over. despite valiant efforts to stop it, terri was eventually honorably discharged against her will. which is exactly what happens to 90% of military personnel who reports rapes. the navy lost a good soldier that day. the navy also kept a rapist. not officially, of course, because there was never an investigation. the reason, because in the military the authority to report one lies with the chain of command. the chain of command is incentivized not to do so because they are judged on how few instances of rape and other mishappens occur during their command.

this is as true today as it was when terri served. that is why terri odom has once again answered the call to service. she is here with me this morning to make sure her story is heard. this nation must aggressively pursue rape charges in our military. sexual assault cases must be taken out of the chain of command and must never be punished by nonjudicial remedies like a mere demotion in rank. finally, a uniform is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. sex offenders must be in the same national database as those in the civilian world. two decades ago a young woman served proudly in the united states navy and knew she was making the world a better place. then, a criminal and a criminally negligent system conspired to take it all away from her. but that young woman is back and she is not alone. women and men from every branch of the military are speaking

up. this is a problem we can fix. we only have to want to. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana, mr. burton, for five minutes. mr. burton: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. burton: and to be recognized for five minutes. madam speaker, i listened to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talking about the need for us to get our economic house in order. the president down at the white house is saying we have to raise taxes because we have a revenue problem. we need to bring in more money. the fact of the matter is that this last year we had a 7% increase in taxes coming in. we had a 7% increase in taxes coming in even though we have the unemployment problems that we have. the problem was we spent 11%

more than we took in. so the problem that we have right now is that the white house is spending too much money. we have to cut spending. we're bringing in more money than we did last year, last fiscal year, but we're spending way more than that. so we have a spending problem, not a taxing problem. now, they also said that we ought to tax the rich more. the fact is that the top 20% wage earners in this country, the top 20% pay over 85% of the taxes. if they raise that tax up, you're taking more money out of the people's pockets who can invest in companies and business and industry that will create jobs and products that we can export around the world. i don't understand why we can't get that point across very clearly to the american people. if we want to cure the unemployment problem, which is now 9.2%, what we have to do is

get the private sector in a position where they can create more jobs. that means we need to lower taxes, not raise them, like ronald reagan did. we need to cut government regulations so that the private sector won't be strangled by the regulations in this country, and then let the free enterprise system work. if we do that, unemployment will go down, in will be more people working. therefore, there will be more taxpayers paying into the treasury. therefore, the deficit will go down, and we won't have the economic problems we have today. but raising taxes right now on any part of our society will only exacerbate the problem. and if the president has his way, and we end up raising taxes -- and i'm not going to vote for it -- then what will happen is unemployment get worse and worse and worse. we have to do what's economically correct, fiscally responsible, and that is to cut spending and to not raise

taxes, especially in this climate, and if we do that and free up the free enterprise system this country will get back on track very quickly. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today.

have a debt crisis, not because they are under taxed it is because this president and previous democratic congresses have spent too much. we look at the government takeover of our health care come over $1 trillion, and the president's failed stimulus plan, $1.20 trillion with interest, garden writing government known as non defense discretionary, up 24% in two years. and under the spending spree that has helped to run this economy into a ditch, leaving millions of unemployed. the president answered, but us raise taxes on job creators. mr. president, the american people do not want that. that will not work. besides tax increases on job creators, we have seen no real plan out of the president.

as the head of the congressional budget office has said, we cannot estimate a speech. we can only estimate a plan. house republicans have led with a budget that dealt with the debt crisis that this president and the previous democratic congress had made far, far worse. 100% of the problem is on the spending side. 100% of the problem has to come from the spending side. >> spending cuts have to be larger than the increases in the debt ceiling. secondly, no tax increases on the table. third, we need to have real controls in place to make sure this never happens again. the fact is, house republicans have a plan. we passed our budget in the spring, outlined our priorities.

where is the president's plan? when is he going to lay his cards on the table? this debt limit increase is his problem, and it is time for him to lead by putting his plan on the table, something that the congress can pass. >> the president has talked over the last day or so about the need to address the big problem, which our entitlement programs, specifically, health care entitlement and their trajectory. it is gratifying to see the president joining us and if we have to do something about it. as the chairman just said, we are the ones that came forward and said, we are where to put health care entitlement in our budget because we believe this is how you get the fiscal house in order. i appreciate the president saying we need to do something about the long-term health of our country and entitlement. i appreciate the fact that he

thinks he has got prescription to do so. what i do not understand is why in the world would the president and i that to tax increases? if it is the right thing to do for the country, why is he tied it into imposing greater costs on the people of this country at a time when they can least deal with that? >> we all know the point in time where we are. this short time frame, have a year, republicans have been in the majority. we have laid down a budget that can say the type of the program for future generations. we have watched jobs under this administration continue to go away. this is a unique opportunity for us to correct the problem. so that our speaker and leader go down and continue to work with the president to try to find a career of former we can

change our spending habits, you will find on the week of the 18th on this floor, we will bring up for long term, a balanced budget amendment. we want to make sure that we do not get into this again. 16 years ago, this country came one vote shy of having a balanced budget. had that past, we would not be where we are today. so as we solve this problem today, let us also look to the future. as every american realizes, when you look to your family, it is not what you will become, but what your children will become. this is our opportunity to solve the problem long term. >> our conference just had a great discussion about the future of america, and we talked about our commitment to do with what is good and right for america. we believe that we have taken on as a country is unsustainable, and that it threatens our

economic future, those opportunities for our children and grandchildren. yesterday, the president came out and said we needed to take the band-aid off, step up. every step of the way, house republicans, this new majority, has been part of the solution. we have been negotiating in good faith. i would say to the president right now, we need to put back on the table, some of the item that he took off early on. he took off changes to obamacare, the repeal of obamacare. we believe those are parts of the solution and we want to put them back on the table and move forward in a way that makes sure merkel gets its fiscal house in order and get back on track. >> mr. speaker, you said this is a time when americans can least afford an increase in taxes. it it not only a time when they

can least afford cuts in social services? >> if we do not fix the entitlement programs, they will not exist. the trustees have made clear, there are serious deficiencies there. we have to make changes to make sure that these programs, which are important for tens of millions of americans, are there for the long term. >> president obama has put a age for qualifying for medicare on the table. essentially, assigning new a homework assignment, what sacred cows would republican be willing to touch in these negotiations? >> again, we all agree we have to do something about the long- term trajectory on programs and we have to fix them for the health of this country. it is unfathomable to me why our president thinks he has got to condition any prescription to fix these programs on tax increases.

again, if that is what he is looking for, we are not going there. right now, this economy is ailing. we do not believe, nor do i think the american people believe, that raising taxes is the answer. so let us fix the entitlements, like the president said, without raising taxes. that we can focus on the issues that he would like to focus on, and we would like to focus on, which is our tax code. but why does he insist on raising taxes when we are trying to fix the health of this country? >> leader mcconnell said he does not think that a deal can be cut with this present bill. you said you were confident that you enjoyed his company. do you agree with the leader on the other side? >> finding agreement has

certainly been elusive. the biden talks went well. those talks went on for about seven weeks. i have been in conversation with the president for the last couple of months. the president talks a good game, but when it comes time to actually putting these issues on the table, making decisions, they cannot quite pull the trigger. i was born with the glass half full. i am an optimist. i am optimistic we can do the right thing for the country. >> everyone in the room says the same thing. the president says republicans have to make concessions to move the small forward. where are those concessions? >> i do not know why he believes it will be any easier for republicans than democrats to make these tough decisions, in

terms of reducing spending. washington has a spending problem. we do not have a river the problem -- revenue problem. thank you. >> is your politics making it harder to reach a deal? >> house republicans from about 10:15 this morning. also this morning, congressional quarterly reported that senate republicans will meet to discuss a contingency plan to avoid government defaults after mitch mcconnell said this morning negotiations with the obama administration will not produce a deficit reduction deal. also this morning, "national journal" is reporting that a top congressional sources are considered cancelling the first week of the summer break scheduled to begin august 6. discussions to resume this afternoon at 3:45 at the white house. the house is back in in about 10

minutes to continue debate on energy and water spending, and the reauthorization of the flood insurance. to take us to the house, the views of "washington journal" callers from this morning. at are your thoughts? caller: good morning. we should work on a grand bargain, instead of a mini-deal. to me, it is basic common sense. we need to get people moving in the process. it could be a national bordering program -- national program to do some work that would stimulate your psychological and

social well-being. secondly, we should be making sure the parties are not playing politics and bowling to their constituents, who basically seem like the corporations that are running the government. host: would you characterize the tea party as a corporate complex? caller: the tea party has merits. we understand their protests. there seems to be sort of an ideology attached to it, as well, which is under the surface of the tea party. host: let's talk to william, a democrat in hollywood, florida. go ahead. ay the: i'm going to s

grand deal. that's what we need to make. second of all, entitlements, the big three for democrats -- the other two spong of of the other, which is social security -- spawn off of the other, which is social security. those are things that help the poor. because it did not work the way they wanted it to, they let it ballooned to a situation where it has gotten out of hand. host: william, as a democrat, do you think your party can compromise on reforming social security and medicare? caller: like the president said, only if it meant a strengthening social security. first of all, they need to bring back the money that they took out.

leave that alone. second of all, yes, medicare will have a problem in the future. they have to be very careful about where they slice and dice on medicare. host: you want the savings from cuts to medicare and social security. caller: we want the savings. we want the savings. of course, we want the savings. if you look at it -- it does not take a rocket scientist to see. spending is going up. average worker pay has not even food,d to pay istay level with gas, and other necessities. host: william, this is "the washington post" editorial today. they say --

host: louisville, ky. jim, republican, go ahead calle. caller: put a constitutional amendment them let the public vote on it to have a balanced budget. second, put central park in new york city up for sale to pay off the national debt. put that on the budget.

i mean, with the fall election. put it out for the nation to vote on. the third would be -- have congress get straight and balanced with all these illegal s working on construction sites in the united states. host: "the washington post" -- more details for you. host: and then inside "the new york times" this is their story.

as we go to this next phone call, i want to show you "the new york post" shows you what the president wants and what republicans want. mary, an independent collar, go ahead. caller: i just want to say they should go for the big deal. it's time to make changes. we have to make those changes. the republicans are not being very logical on what they want. we are giving up a lot -- the democrats and independents. in general, americans have given up a lot on this deal the president wants to put through. it is time for all of us to give

something. host: you are willing to sacrifice on the social security and medicare part? caller: yes, absolutely. sacrificing, making changes, yes, of course. host: a republican in tennessee. caller: good morning. thank you very much for taking my call. host: good morning. caller: this thing about the national debt -- $2 trillion or $4 trillion does not really take care of the national debt. we really need to have something more than that. just the $4 trillion pays the interest on the debt over the next 10 years. you have not really gotten to the point where you have reduced the deficit down to where it is manageable.

host: in your opinion, even a grand bargain is not good enough. caller: exactly. we have climbed into a hole that will be hard to climb out of fear g. if they do not make changes, this entire country will collapse under financial ruin. host: a little more from the papers. many of the papers have this story this morning. "cantor reemerge as as a key negotiator in the debt talks." a different take on that in "the los angeles times." here is "the richmond times dispatch." here is "politico" this morning

and they quote some freshmen, saying this. host: also in the newspapers, there's a story about the tea party. here it is in "usa today." "tea party activists >> we are living this not for coverage of the u.s. house as they come in for legislative work, beginning with a bill to reauthorize the flood insurance program through 2016. general debate on that first and then they return to the amendment work on the 2012 bill

for energy and water with boats through the afternoon.

the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. loving and gracious god, we give you thanks forgiving us another day. we ask today that you bless the members of this assembly to be the best and most faithful servants of the people they serve. purify their intentions that they will say what they believe and act consistently with their

words. let them be filled with gratitude from the opportunity they have to serve in this place. we thank you for the abilities they have been given to do their work, to contribute to the common good. may they use their talents as good stewards of your many gifts and thereby be true servants of justice and partners in peace. we thank you as well for this marvelous forum where the important business of this nation has been done in the past and is done today. may the work being done now be guided by your spirit. may all that is done this day in the people's house be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval

thereof. the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman from arkansas, mr. crawford. mr. crawford: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection, so ordered. mr. poe: mr. speaker, over the weekend john wesley nero got into an arguement with his mother and his grandmother so being a scoundral he beat them both up and then fled in the

darkness of the night. local bow month, texas, police officers confronted the outlaw to confront him but he fled away and a high speed chase occurred. meanwhile officer brian hubert, right here is a photograph of him, had positioned his vehicle ahead of the chase. he attempted to retrieve road spikes out of the trunk to stop nero's vehicle. according to witnesses, when nero spotted hubert's car, nero intentionally crashed into hubert's patrol ca car, shoving the vehicle over officer hubert and killing him. officer brian hubert, 36 warkses a 10-year veteran of the police department. john wesley nero is charged with capital murder. police officers like officer hubert protect from us killers like nero. they are the wall between the law and the lawless. the barrier between us and evil doers. so today the badges of peace officers in southeast texas are covered with the black cloth of

sacrifice in honor of officer hebert. a law man who sacrificed life to uphold the law. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? mr. kucinich: i request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. kucinich: social security didn't create the deficit, but america's seniors are being presented with a fake social security crisis. to try to trick them into accepting reduced benefits. social security will be able to pay 100% of its benefits through 2037 without any changes what soofer. so why the panic today? if seniors accept cuts in social security benefits today, a surplus cash flow will build in the social security trust fund. according to c.i.s., quote, social security's cash surpluses are borrowed by the u.s. treasury and can be used for tax cuts, spending or repaying debt. so here's what's going on. social security benefit cuts are

increaseing taxes paid to social security or extending retirement age will give more money for tax cuts spending except for one thing, social security money belongs to those who have paid into the fund, it's not the government's money to use it, it shouldn't be the government's money to play with. senior citizens should not have to accept a reduced standard of living to finance tax cuts for the rich. we must take a stand for senior citizens and protect social security and protect future generations from this raid on social security funds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today in support of funding for the army corps of engineers directed toward improving infrastructure in the damaged levee system that needs critical restoration after this historic season of flooding. the unprecedented flooding along the lower mississippi river valley touched every part of the first district of arkansas, my

home district, and profoundly impacted our way of life. homes and property were damaged, businesses were closed and a vast amount of crop land was under water shortly after planting season had begun. mr. crawford: preliminary estimates of crop damage across arkansas has surpassed half a billion dollars, a huge toll on my district's agriculture-based economy. this bill provides farmers with the insurance necessary to reinvest in future production. much of america's commodities are produced along the mississippi delta and we must take the necessary steps to ensure our safe and reliable food supply is protected. this vital investment in our nation's infrastructure and levee system will provide security not only to our farmers but the families who live and work there as well as our consumers all across the country. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.

>> madam speaker, i come to the house floor today to pay tribute to a man of exceptional valor, a quiet hero, a committed family man, a successful entrepreneur and my constituent, leonard earl roberts sr. ms. bass: he lived an extraordinary life. he joined the civilian conservation corps at 16 and later voluntarily enlisted in the u.s. army after the attack on pearl harbor. platoon sergeant roberts led a special unit ashore on d-day. he and his entire squadron received the bronze indian arrow head for assault troopers and he received the purple heart. after he was honorably discharged at the close of the war, mr. roberts returned home to claim the hand of his childhood sweetheart, dezzy, and then used the g.i. bill to attend the massachusetts institute of technology. mr. roberts used his m.i.t. engineering degree to invent a machine that would revolutionize the aerospace industry and in 1972 in california, when his

wife and family by his side, leonard sr. established roberts aerospace manufacturing engineering corporation, one of today's leading companies in the industry. leonard earl roberts sr. was a great american born of a great generation. he was a man of service, honor, integrity, faith and family. he lived an inspirational life and our nation will forever be enriched because of him. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new hampshire rise? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i rise today to address the issue of jobs and job creation in our country. for 29 consecutive months we have seen unemployment exceed 8% . back in june we announced 18,000 jobs were created in can this country, for a now 9.2%

unemployment rate. in new hampshire i've established a getting people back to work initiative where i've hosted two job fairs, over 200 people have attended. back here in washington, people like that gentleman need us to pass a balanced budget, to reduce our spending, to reduce our debt and deficit and get serious about creating an environment where small business can once again succeed in our country. mr. guinta: i have and hope that the senate and the administration will join the house in this effort. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york rise? the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. maloney: madam speaker, i respectfully suggest a small correction to the republican statement that their position on the deficit negotiations is no new taxes. it would be far more accurate for them to state that their position is no new taxes except

for seniors. because sharp increases to participate in the cost of medicare and medicaid or decreases in the benefits of social security would act just like a tax income targeted right at the elderly. the republican proposal for medicare would hit retired seniors immediately by reopening the doughnut hole and according to a report by the joint economic committee from my home state of new york it would cost future retirees an additional $6,500 out of pocket. you can call that some sort of adjustment if you'd like but i call it a tax and i call it wrong. grover nor quest agrees. he says changes to the c.p.i. is a stealth tax increase. wrong for our seniors, wrong for the economy and wrong for the country. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise?

>> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. 9.2% unemployment in june, 29 months in a row of over 8% unemployment. 20 million americans remain unemployed or underemployed. it has to stop. these are stark reminders that president obama's excessive spending, unprecedented debt and overregulation as well as the threats of job-killing taxes on small businesses and entrepreneurs are holding back priority sector job creation in our economy. american job creators fear the regulatory and fiscal environment they will face in the near future. until they have some certainty they will not invest or hire. we're working hard to bring back that certainty and ensure our progrowth economic environment, by doing that we must cut red tape, cut spending and keep taxes low, but also pass

legislation to expand domestic energy production and open new markets for american goods overseas. mr. hultgren: we need president obama -- and his party, to stop trying to raise taxes on job creators and instead embrace our commonsense proposal to put americans back to work. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. as secretary geithner has observed, failure to raise the debt ceiling would have catastrophic economic consequences that would last for decades. mr. quigley: this was assured by former treasury secretary paulson who said that inaction is simply not an option. i agree. and believe that raising the debt ceiling must be accompanied by deficit reduction. also by cutting spending, but also by elimb hit thatting some unnecessary -- eliminating some unnecessary tax breaks. there are those who say there are no unnecessary tax breaks. let me just give you one. if your neighbor guys -- buys a

car and pays interest on the loan to buy that car, that interest is not tax deductible. if your other neighbor buys aat and pays interest -- buys a yacht and pay interests to buy that, that interest is tax deductible. when we're borrowing 40 cents for every dollar, we have to ask ourselves if those tax breaks are really worth it. if we're starting from scratch, would we really give yacht owners an extra tax break? thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. it was with great sadness that west michigan learned on friday of the passing of our first lady, betty ford. the first lady spent most of her life in grand rapids, a graduate of central high school she worked in a department store downtown and was a dance instructor. early on, mrs. ford showed her heart for the disadvantaged in

our community, teaching dance to children who were physically disabled, deaf and blind. a mutual friend introduced mrs. ford to jerry in 1947. the successful lawyer and former star of the university of michigan's football team, the future president was not quite in public life when they met. no one could have foreseen the set of circumstances that thrust the fords into the white house. mr. amash: but mrs. ford took the challenge with gusto and as first lady she revealed many of he's struggles to the public so she could help others with similar difficulties. in the 1970's she publicly spoke about her bat well breast cancer which is not often discussed during that time. and in the 198s to she took the lessons she learned battling alcoholism to fund a number of institutes dedicated to helping others with the affliction. we are proud to call such a fine citizen one of our own. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman

from connecticut rise? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. courtney: president ronald reagan said the following, the full consequences after default or even serious prospect of default by the united states are impossible to predict and awe some to contemplate. denigration of the full faith and credit of the united states would have substantial effects on domestic financial markets and the value of the dollar in exchanges markets. the risks, costs, disruptions, and the damage lead me to one conclusion, the senate must pass this legislation before the congress adjourns. thank goodness congress had the good sense to listen and pass a higher debt limit with no conditions at a time, by the way, when medicare solvency was far worse than it is today. and 16 more times during the reagan presidency. today we have the head of the national republican party saying yesterday, don't worry, the government will find some other way to pay its bills. that is dangerous nonsense. it is time for the republican party to stop playing russian

roulette with the american economy and american families. let's pass a clean debt limit and move on to growing the u.s. economy and create jobs. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. cohen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cohen: on sunday like millions of other americans i was watching the women's soccer team play in germany. what a wonderful moment it was when they came back at the last second and clutched -- grabbed victory from defeat. abby wambach's header and the save by hope solo and five kicks by the american women made us proud to be americans. the american soccer team won and they are going to play again tomorrow and we need to cheer for them. amy, when asked about her kick, said, it was something about being an american. we don't give up. we know we can win. and we don't give up and we win. i would ask my republican

colleagues to remember abby wambach and not give up and win on the deficit because otherwise we'll be losers in the eyes of the world on our economics and our ability to finance our own debt. go united states of america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. pence: thank you. well, negotiations over the nation's debt ceiling have reached an impasse after more than two years in office, trillions of dollars in borrowing and spending and bailouts, and takeovers, the president now says the failure to reach an agreement is because of republicans in the congress. republicans who were in the minority in the last congress, in fact. the president says because republicans in washington haven't fully realized that the philosophy of politics does not work in governing. he's telling us to eat our peas.

ok. the president basically is saying the congress owns the problem. that's not what he said five years ago. explaining his opposition to raising the debt ceiling then senator barack obama said, quote, the fact we are here today raising america's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. he said doing so weakens us domestically. leadership means the buck stops here. america has a debt problem and failure of leadership. he said americans deserve better. i say, senator obama, you were right. when the u.s. government can't pay its bills, it's not only a debt problem it is a failure of leadership at the presidential level just as you said. the truth is it's the president's problem. if president obama wants to raise the debt ceiling, he should bring back -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. pence: and come to the congress to ask us to step forward and help him solve that problem by cutting spending now. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. pence: and sending a balanced budget amendment to the states. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii rise? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. ms. hirono: thank you, madam speaker. we can all agree that we need to bring down our deficit, but we disagree on how to do it. republicans in congress say that the only way to do this is to gut the services that american families rely on. their priority is to protect the wealthiest among us who continue to enjoy loopholes and tax breaks. they should be paying their fair share. social security is a promise to every american worker for years of hard work and provides dignity in retirement and help to support surviving children. today nearly 55 million americans rely on social security, including 214,000 in hawaii. the program is viletal to women, particularly single women, who disproportionately face poverty in old age. the american middle class and our seniors deserve a fair

solution on the deficit that gets our economy back on track and creates jobs. but not, not on the backs of our families and seniors. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from maryland rise? ms. edwards: madam speaker, permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. ms. edwards: thank you, madam speaker. the ongoing stubbornness by my republican colleagues to even general tain the idea of increasing revenues is putting our country at risk. over the past decade the top 2% of americans making over $250,000 have done incredibly well. and while they have enjoyed reduced taxes as a result of the bush year tax cuts, our seniors or workers don't even come close. they have lost pension, 401-k plans, home values, and all that's left is social security and medicare.

as you can see here these tax cuts are the primary contributor to our debt and deficit over the long term. madam speaker, default on america's debt would be catastrophic to both our economy and the world. it's time for my republican colleagues to get serious, stop playing with fire, and put the future of the nation first ahead of millionaires, corporations that avoid taxes, and benefit from loopholes in the law and ahead of those who ship jobs overseas. so, no, seniors and those are disabilities didn't cause this deficit as we can see in the long-term debt and they shouldn't have to cut their benefits to pay for it. with that i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island rise? mr. cicilline: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: madam speaker, last week's jobs report showing unemployment rate going in the wrong direction from 9.1% to 9.2% underscores the urgent need to focus on policies in this house that help create jobs and

grow the economy. part of that agenda should be passage of the offshoring prevention act of 2011 which i introduced last week. at a time when we should be working to restore our manufacturing sector, we are undermining it because our tax code actually rewards companies that send manufacturing jobs overseas. the offshore and prevention act will close the tax loophole that allows this to happen. it's been 27 weeks since the majority party took control of this house and they have done nothing to create jobs. they haven't even brought a single jobs bill to the house floor. while they have been on the most important priority for our country, democrats have put forth our jobs agenda, the make it in america agenda, which will help rebuild our manufacturing base, invest in policy that keep good paying jobs here in america and allow us to compete in the global economy. madam speaker, this is the kind of legislation we should be pursuing here in this house. sensible legislation that helps our recovering economy, helps us

compete in the global marketplace, and puts americans back to work. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to honor the bravery and valor of sergeant first class leroy petri of santa fe who will be awarded the medal of hon yar today by president obama. mr. lujan: as the second living recipient, his heroism and sacrifice in the face of extreme danger went above and beyond the call of duty. as an army ranger serving in afghanistan, he acted without regard for his own personal safety. thinking only of his fellow soldiers when he threw a grenade away from his squad. his selfless actions cost him his right hand. he saved the lives of his brothers in arms. new mexico has a long tradition of serving our country during times of war. world war ii navajo code talkers

contributed to the victory of our allied forces. 71 daughters and sons of new mexico have made the ultimate sacrifice in service during the afghanistan and iraq wars. and now with his courageous actions in the face of great danger, sargeent -- sergeant petri takes his place among true american heroes. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from vermont rise? mr. welch: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. welch: thank you, madam speaker. president reagan is an iconic figure in the republican party and revered by many democrats. he did fight to shrink government and he lowered taxes, but he also raised taxes eight times and he also fought against the absurd notion that america had an option when it came to paying our bills. when the debt ceiling had to be raised, he did it because he knew that was essential. that was our responsibility. we've got an argument on the

other side today that paying our bills is optional. that is dangerous, that is absurd. there's two arguments the other side is making, one it's obama's problem despite the fact they insisted on the iraq war, afghanistan war, going into nation buildings, tructs we can't afford. medicare prescription part d. second, this is what's really not on the level, every single person who voted for the ryan budget voted for a budget that will raise the debt from $14.3 trillion to $23 trillion. after voting for that budget, now will vote against raising the debt ceiling that is required to implement the budget that you voted for. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, as negotiations continue in the upcoming debt ceiling, the retirement savings, mortgages, and pensions of the american

people hang in the balance. mr. baca: it is long mast time for both sides, i say for both sides to get serious about balanced budget. any long-term term, must, must protect medicare and social security for all americans. create jobs here at home. begin to reduce the deficit with intelligent class protection. it's time for the wealthiest among us to step up to the plate and take a fair share. we must end tax breaks for ultrarich, big oil companies, and the corporations that ship jobs overseas. no jobs have been created, i state no jobs have been created in the united states since the tax bush cuts first went into effect. no taxes, no jobs. no taxes, no jobs. let us put politics aside and do what is best for the american people before it is too late. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. mr. carnahan: this image depicts a watershed moment for our nation's senior citizens. president harry truman conceived of medicare during his presidency, and received the first medicare card after president johnson signed the program into law 46 years ago. when 40% of americans over the age of 65 lived at or below the poverty level, largely due to medical costs. now only 10% live in poverty. but my republican colleagues seek to radically alter this successful program. their plan would double annual out-of-pocket expenses from 6,000 to 12,000. would give insurers companies

the power to ration care and force seniors to spend another $2.2 billion on prescription drugs by reopening the doughnut hole. madam speaker, balancing the budget is a national priority. everyone needs to work together and everyone has to sacrifice to get our fiscal house in order. but my republican colleagues continue to argue for special interest exceptions from that national sacrifice. they are letting oil companies and companies sending jobs overseas off the hook. why should profitable companies continue receiving taxpayer subsidies while we are asking grandma to pay more? madam speaker, if medicare turns 46 let's get serious. let's be sure that this is a national priority and national sacrifice. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky rise? mr. yarmuth: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. yarmuth: thank you. madam speaker, we have a lot of americans who engage in very reckless behavior. but generally that reckless

behavior only affects them and maybe their friends or neighbors. the republican majority in this congress is reckless enough they want to endanger 310 million americans. reckless enough that they will refuse to pay our debts no matter what kind of a deal is worked out. reckless enough to make us default on the full faith and credit of the united states. reckless enough to raise interest rates on not only our debt, thereby making the deficit worse, but on every american who has a credit card and adjustable rate mortgage and borrowing money. reckless enough according to a bipartisan panel that came to this body last week to take away 10% of g.d.p., costing this country hundreds of thousands if not millions of jobs in the month of august alone. . we have a responsibility to the american people to perform for the interests of their lives and this country and reckless

behavior, refusing to raise the debt limit of the united states is about as reckless as you can get. we need to act responsibly. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? >> address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. ellison: madam speaker, let me draw your attention to this important chart drafted by the congressional budget office. it shows what the drivers of our debt are. now, there's something on here that you see and there's something on here that you won't see. will you see bush-era tax cuts. this is the orange. you will see the wars in iraq and afghanistan, that's the red. you will see the economic downturn, that's the blue. this tiny little line here, that's tarp and fannie mae and freddie mac and these are the expenses that we paid to try to get our country back on track, the recovery. what don't you see? you don't see social security,

don't let anybody tell you, madam speaker, that social security is the problem. it's not. social security is the promise one generation makes to another so that every senior in america will live in dignity. that's what it's for, that's what it's about. we are not being unreasonable when we demand protection of social security. it's not driving the deficit and it does honor our seniors and that is what it's all about. that's what we're going to do and we're not going to give up on that. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois rise? mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 1309. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 340 and rule 18, the chair declares

the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r. 1309. the chair appoints the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 130 which the clerk will report by title -- 1309 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: to achieve reforms to improve the financial integrity and stability of the program and to increase the role of private markets in the management of flood insurance risk and for other purposes. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the first time. the gentlewoman from illinois,

mrs. biggert, and the gentlewoman from california, ms. waters, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from illinois. mrs. biggert: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the following letters be inserted for the record. a letter dated june 2, 2011, from the committee on financial services, chairman spencer bachus to the committee on the judiciary, chairman lamar smith, a letter dated june 2, 2011, from the committee on the judiciary, chairman lamar smith, to the committee on financial services chairman, spencer bachus. a letter dated june 2, 2011, from the committee on financial services chairman, bachus, to committee on science, space and technology chairman hall, and a letter dated june 2, 2011, from the committee on science, space and technology chairman hall to the committee on financial services chairman bachus. the chair: those will be considered under general leave.

the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you, madam chairman, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: mr. chairman, i rise in support of h.r. 1309, the flood insurance reform act of 2011. i'd like to thank appellate waters and all the members -- ms. waters and all the members from both sides of the ilet who helped to craft this bill. on may 13, the financial services committee favorably reported the flood act by a unanimous vote of 54-0. this bill is important and reflects the hard work and bipartisan support of the financial services committee. it would re-authorize for five years the national flood insurance program and s.i.p., the bill would enact a series of reforms designed to, number one, improve nfib's financial stability, two, to reduce the burden on taxpayers, three, restore integrity to fema

mapping system, four, to explore ways to increase private market participation, and, six, to help bring certainty to the housing market. for over 40 years taxpayers have subsidized flood insurance premiums for policy holders, to improve nfib's financial stability, h.r. 1309 phases in sound rates for policy holders and phases out taxpayer subsidized rates. and to result the congressional budget office stated that the bill generates $4.2 billion and absent a katrina-like catastrophe the bill will actually accelerate nfib's payments on its $17.75 billion debt to the taxpayer. as it stands nfib has already paid back taxpayers about $1.8 billion. but perhaps most importantly h.r. 1309 eliminates a barrier to the development of a private

flood insurance market and puts us on a path towards a responsible long-term plan that eliminates taxpayer risk. for the first time policy holders can choose private flood insurance over government flood insurance without the risk of lender rejection and the bill eliminates taxpayer subsidized rates so that the private sector can offer consumers increasingly competitive rates compared to the nf bimbings,. second, fema is required to solicit bids to determine the cost of the private sector, not to the taxpayer bearing the risk of flood insurance. third, it requires that g.a.o. and fema evaluate the feasibility of voluntary community-based flood insurance. and, fourth, the bill reiterates fema's existing authority to purchase free insurance from the private sector as an alternative to the u.s. treasury and taxpayers serving as a backstop to nfib. and finally the bill addresses

many of the concerns that members have raised with us about new maps, especially as they relate to the dam and levee dessertfications. it allows communities to suspend the requirement to purchase flood insurance while they work to construct or fix their flood protection systems. madam chairman, when congress created nfib, there was no flood insurance market. taxpayers were providing increasingly amounts of direct assistance to disaster relief to flood victims. without reforms contained in this bill, taxpayers will never be able to pay back the debt they are owed, homeowners and businesses will have limited or no access to flood insurance and congress will inevitably have to bail out flood disaster victims as it did prior to 1968. we cannot allow this to happen. this bill is the first significant reform to the program in nearly a decade, the nfib is too important to let lapse and too in debt to

continue without reform. i look forward to today's amendments and debate and urge my colleagues to support the underlying bill. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: thank you, madam chairwoman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. waters: thank you very much. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 1309, the flood insurance reform act of 2011. before i begin my remarks i would like to thank chairman spencer bachus, chairwoman judy biggert and ranking member barney frank for their assistance and support with this bill. we were able to work in a bipartisan manner on this bill and our committee, passing it on a vote of 54-0. the spirit of corporation between republicans and

democrats on this bill has been extremely welcome and this is why i'm proud to be an original co-sponsor of this bill. madam chairwoman, earlier this year i introduced similar legislation, h.r. 1026, the flood insurance reform priorities act, a version of my bill passed the house last year on a bipartisan vote and i hope that the bill offered by the gentlewoman from s will also pass the house with significant support from both parties. the flood insurance program is more important now than ever before. floods are the most common natural disaster and flood insurance is the most effective means for helping families to rebuild after a flood. therefore it is vital that flood insurance remain accessible, affordable and available to the 5.5 million homeowners with

policies and the many more who may want or need to purchase them. unfortunately the lack of a long-term authorization has placed the flood insurance program at risk. the program lapsed three times last year. these lapses meant that fema was not able to write new policies, renew expiring policies or increase coverage limits. given the current crisis in the housing market, this instability in the flood insurance program is unacceptable and must be addressed. i am pleased that the gentlewoman's bill not only re-authorizes the program for five years but also provides the program with the tools it needs to return to a strong financial footing while protecting homeowners. the bill also addresses the impact of new flood maps on communities. the mapping process has caused confusion and financial strain

on homeowners who now find themselves in flood zones and subject to mandatory purchase requirements. i saw this firsthand in my home city of los angeles. last year i was able to assist homeowners in an area of the city who had been mistakenly placed in a flood zone. in that case fema acted quickly to respond to new data and correct the mistake. however there are thousands of homeowners nationwide who now find themselves in flood zones and subject to mandatory purchase requirements. the gentlewoman's bill would ease the financial strain on newly mapped homeowners by allow for a three-year delay of the mandatory purchase requirement and allows for a five-year phase-in of actual rates afterwards. in addition, i know that the gentleman from alabama, the chairman of the committee, will be offering an amendment similar

to the one i offered at markup that would extend the three-year delay to five years. i know that the gentleman has worked with the bipartisan coalition, of hebs of the house -- of members of the house and i look forward to passage of that amendment. to make sure that fema issues the most accurate maps, the bill establishes a technical mapping advisory council. by improving the mapping process, the council will prevent instances of erroneous flood maps like the one i encountered in park mesa heights. the bill also makes other improvements to the program by phasing in rates for preform properties, raising maximum coverage limits, providing notice to renters about contents insurance and allowing homeowners that receive letters of map amendments to be

reimbursed for their cost. mr. chairman, madam chair obama, -- chairwoman, i believe that mrs. biggert and i have produced a good bill that will protect homeowners, the flood insurance program and taxpayers. i hope that we can pass this bill today and that the senate takes up flood insurance reform in short order so that we do not risk another lapse when the program expires on september 30 of this year. again, i thank the gentlewoman from illinois for her tremendous work on this bill and i strongly urge an aye vote. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from west virginia, mrs. capito. the chair: the gentlewoman from west virginia is recognized for two minutes. mrs. capito: thank you, madam chair. i rise in support of the legislation that is before us

today, to reform the national flood insurance program. i'd like to thank the gentlelady from illinois, mrs. biggert, and ms. waters, for their hard work to bring forth a bipartisan bill which addresses many of the concerns to a program hampered by extraordinary losses and currently facing about $18 billion of debt. h.r. 1309 provides a long-term extension of the national flood insurance program but it makes significant -- it makes a significantly indebted program more fiscally sound. a five-year re-authorization will give the certainty that is needed to a program that has been without it for the past two years. . when more than five million policy holders depend on it for financial security against flooding. unless congressional action is taken on september 30, 2011, these policy holders will begin to be again in danger of losing

protection. unfortunately the persistence subsidized rates for properties in high risk areas has left the nfip underfunded and at risk. this bill makes needed reforms to put premiums more in line with risk by incorporating rates for at risk properties. increasing the limit on annual premium rate increases will gradually phase out subsidized premiums and help reduce taxpayer exposure. . this allows property relief from the mandatory purchase requirement for up to three years so they may be able to plan better to being newly mapped into a special flood area. this gives us a chance to give long-term certainty to policyholders as well as insurers who participate in the program. in this still unsure housing market, it is critical we provide as much clarity as possible to current and future homeowners. i'm very pleased this legislation looks at privatization initiatives and the possibilities that the private market as well as

reinsurance can play in protecting communities against future flood damages. it is my hope that we will pass this bill and again i want to congratulate the gentlewoman for her hard work. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: thank you very much. madam chairwoman, i yield to the gentlelady from new york, three minutes. she has been very much involved in the development of this legislation. and worked very hard. i yield three minutes. the chair: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you, madam chairman, i'd also like to thank ms. waters for offering me this time. mrs. mccarthy: it's been a pleasure working with her. i'd also like to thank chairman ba cuss and subcommittee biggert who we worked on because this is something important to both our districts. also thanking member barney frank. h.r. 1309, the flood inchshurens reform act of 2011 re-authorizes the national flood insurance program for five years, but provides much needed reforms to

the national flood insurance program. my district in long island, especially the community of valley stream, was included in the early rounds of the fema's implementation of the flood map modernization process and we have experienced much of the frustrations associated with the process. the whole idea of redoing what we are doing in this flood map is hopefully to present other members of congress -- prevent other members of congress from being frustrated as much as i have when they are trying to help their community. since our maps were enacted in 2009, i hear daily from our frustrated homeowners who are required to purchase flood insurance because of the updated maps and who feel they did not have the time or tools necessary to understand and respond to the map's results. h.r. 1309 contains provisions to better inform homeowners who are required to purchase flood insurance because of updated maps. for example, the bill requires

fema to notify federally elected officials when they are -- there are changes to a flood zone or map directly in their district. the bill also requires fema to create a method for flood insurance policies to be paid for the installment payments to ease the burden of having to pay for up front full payment which can cost thousands of dollars. the bill also allows for homeowners who are in their reduced cost prefer risk policy program to enter into the five-year phase in full actuary rates when the extended rate expires in the year 2013. toe to ensure the accuracy of the data and process, fema used in creating the updated maps around the country, h.r. 1309 also creates a technical mapping counsel made of agency employees, experts in the field of mapping to develop new mapping standards for future map modernization activities. we need to use every tool available to bring relief to homeowners who are being

burdened by fema's map authorization progress. and the bill before us is a good start. i'd like also to say once again working with my colleague, mrs. biggert, working on the subcommittee has been a really good process. we have been able to bring our experiences, what will happen in my community in valley stream, and the frustration the homeowners have gone through. this legislation, though it doesn't cure everything, it will help constituents and those that have not had their maps done yet, this is a good way of going forward. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you, madam chairman. i yield 1.5 minutes to the gentleman from tennessee, mr. fincher, a member of the financial services committee.

the chair: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. fincher: thank you. i stand before you today because my district recently suffered severe flooding this spring and summer, which we are now just beginning to recover from. the flooding of the mississippi river caused by an unusual amount of rain from back-to-back storms left thousands of tennesseans with flood damage. in my district alone, over 3,000 homes were damaged by storms and floods and over 4,000 people registered for disaster assistance. because the mississippi river borders 110 miles of tennessee's eighth congressional district, many small towns and farms are subject to unpredictable flooding each year. with this in mind, i am pleased to support h.r. 1309 today. h.r. 1309 re-authorizes the national flood insurance program for five years which would provide some certainty to the economy and to the national housing market. during a period of 9.2% unemployment, we need this

certainty to boost the housing construction industry and to help create badly needed jobs. another reason i am supporting h.r. 1309 today is this legislation encourages greater private sector participation in the national flood insurance program. madam chairman, if we are to reduce federal spending and the size of government in our lives, we need to put every program on the table and analyze ways we can encourage the private sector to shoulder more government risk. i am pleased to support h.r. 1309 and encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: thank you very much, madam chairwoman. i am so pleased to announce three minutes of time for mr. blumenauer from oregon. he has a long history in this area and the national flood insurance act of 2004 bears his name.

i appreciate his support. i yield three minutes. the chair: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for three minutes. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy as i appreciate her leadership and chair biggert for bringing this important legislation to the floor. it is true. i have been working in these areas for the last 10 years to make sure that the program is stable in the long term. encourage participation. and here we are raising rates where necessary to more accurately reflect flood risk. for too long homeowners in low-risk areas have been subsidizing those in high-risk areas all backed by the federal taxpayers. this bill will make the program closer to being actuarially sound. i appreciate the work done to deal with repepively flooded prors which comprise 2% of the properties insured in the program but responsible for 30% of the claims. we do people no favors by paying them to rebuild in the same way and same place time and time again in harm's way. that's why i strongly support the amendment that has been

included in the en bloc to re-authorize and streamline a number of mitigation programs toward targeted towards repetitive flood program. i authored with my colleague from nebraska a program to he provide mitigation assistance for severe repet tip loss properties. unfortunately since 2004 we found the program has been hard for fema to administer. when they have been able to get the program off the ground, it's allowed mitigation of almost 600 properties and saved about $125 million. but if we are able to move forward here, allowing the program to work right, it can make a huge long-term difference both in the lives of property owners as well as the fiscal stability of the program. the waters amendment addresses the administrative programs by combining three mitigation programs into one streamlined provision. remove red tape and enable fema to more easily work with the

communities to mitigate the properties. it's important to note that it does not cost the taxpayers any money. the money for mitigation comes from the flood insurance fund, made up of premium dollars and each dollar spent on mitigation saves the fund far more in the future. i appreciate the work of mrs. biggert, ms. waters, chair bachus, rahm frank, and the -- ranking member frank, and the committee to dig into the details to ensure fema has the tools it needs to address the properties costing the program the most. this is going to go a long way towards helping people out of the cycle of flooding and will help reduce the heavy drain that these properties have on the flood insurance program. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you, madam chairman. i yield 2.5 minutes to the

gentleman from tennessee -- texas, mr. canseco, another great member of the financial services committee. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. canseco: thank you, madam chair. i'd like to thank chairman biggert for her leadership on this bill which makes vital reforms to a troubled program. madam chairman, we are all well aware of the importance of flood insurance. back in texas floods are a common occurrence. and when they happen, they destroy homes, property, and even entire communities. yes, this program provides flood victims with the monetary compensation necessary to begin rebuilding their homes and their lives, yet we cannot forget that the only reason this program is still operating is because taxpayers have failed it out as by any measure it has been insolvent. that is why i'm offering a very simple amendment to this bill that accomplishes three things.

number one, it adds the provision to the bill that recognizes that while flood insurance is important to millions of americans, this program is deeply in debt to the american taxpayer and there is currently no tangible plan to pay that money back. number two, it requires the administrator of fema to report back to the congress within six months a 10-year plan to pay back the $18 billion it currently owes taxpayers. number three, it adds accountability to a program that is far from being fiscally sound. let's keep in mind that if the national flood insurance program were an initiative solely of the private sector, it would have declared bankruptcy long ago. remember also that the person propping up this program, the american taxpayer, is very weary and tired from continually being

held responsible for bailing out government's failed initiatives. for years, the taxpayer has been asked to pick up the tab for government programs no matter how effective or how solvent they may be. the argument was that we could hold off worrying about overspending until we reached a crisis point. well, with each american family now responsible for over $120,000 of the nation's debt and with annual trillion-plus dollar deficits we are now at that crisis point. madam chairman, my amendment and this bill are a step towards bringing fiscal responsibility back to this program, but more importantly, it stands up for the american taxpayer whose voice has been ignored in washington for too long. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from california rise? ms. waters: madam chairwoman, i'm very pleased to recognize

the gentleman from georgia, three minutes, mr. david scott has been a strong advocate for his constituents making sure they could afford it an installment part of this bill is because of his work. i yield three minutes. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for three minutes. mr. scott: thank you, very much, mission waters. let me commend you and chairwoman biggert for your exleapt work on this extraordinarily important -- for your excellent work on this extraordinarily important fees of legislation that is very much needed and people across this country are very grateful we are finally bringing some help here. madam speaker, nothing is more devastating to a family, to a community than to lose almost in the flick of an eye, to lose your home to a flood. i mean totally under water. to lose businesses. this happened in my state in a devastating manner in 2009. it was the worst